Managing information assets using feedback re-enforced search and navigation

ABSTRACT

Embodiments of the invention provide an approach for creating, evolving and using a weighted semantic graph to manage and potentially identify certain information assets within an enterprise. The semantic graph may be generated by monitoring users navigating through search results which provide a set of information assets responsive to a search query. By recording the navigation path taken by many users, relationships between information assets may be identified. Further, once generated, the semantic graph may be used to present users with in indication of related information assets as part of the search results. Further still, the semantic graph may also be used to identify information assert “hubs” as well as information assets that may provide low utility to individuals within the enterprise.

BACKGROUND

Embodiments of the invention are directed to techniques for managinginformation assets in an enterprise environment. More specifically,embodiments of the invention provide an information asset managementtool configured to capture and utilize crowd wisdom in order to identifyand share relationships about information assets within the enterprise.

Organizations commonly have to manage very large-scale informationsystems, which can include a very large number of both interrelated andindependent information assets. While information assets can vary innature, examples include structured systems such as traditionalrelational databases as well as unstructured systems such as contentrepositories and document stores. The degree of formality with whichthese systems are monitored, registered and managed can vary extensivelywithin a large enterprise. An enterprise typically managesmission-critical information systems. However, such systems arefrequently outnumbered by unmanaged systems (e.g., spreadsheets, localdatabase and document stores, as well as other information assets). Moregenerally, it is not unusual for a large enterprise to manage thousandsof distinct information repositories along with a (sometimes unknown)number of ad-hoc data stores and local working environments, which canthemselves also number in the thousands. As noted, the informationassets of a given enterprise are frequently not independent of oneanother. For example, one information asset may store data extracts fromanother information asset. Similarly, information assets can shareprocessing states during data integration (or during extract, transform,and load (ETL) processes), or provide related information repositorieswhich store equivalent information segmented by line of business, and soon. Accordingly, in many cases, understanding the relationships betweenassets may be as important as understanding the assets themselves.

SUMMARY

Embodiments of the invention may be used to help predict when amonitored metric indicates that an impending failure is likely to occurin order to allow a corrective action to be performed. One embodimentincludes a method for presenting relationships between a plurality ofinformation assets managed by an enterprise. The method may generallyinclude identifying, by an enterprise information asset managementapplication executed on a computing system having at least a processorand a memory, a set of search results responsive to a query requesting asubset of information assets within the enterprise. The method may alsoinclude providing the set of search results, receiving a selection of afirst one of the information assets presented in the search results, andidentifying at least a second information asset. The information assetand the second information asset are related to one another by an edgein a semantic graph representing relationships between the plurality ofinformation assets in the enterprise. The method may also includeproviding an indication of the second information asset.

Additional embodiments include a computer-readable storage mediumstoring an application, which, when executed on a processor, performsthe above recited method as well as a system having a processor and amemory storing an enterprise information asset management applicationprogram, which, when executed on the processor, performs the aboverecited method.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

So that the manner in which the above recited aspects are attained andcan be understood in detail, a more particular description ofembodiments of the invention, briefly summarized above, may be had byreference to the appended drawings.

It is to be noted, however, that the appended drawings illustrate onlytypical embodiments of this invention and are therefore not to beconsidered limiting of its scope, for the invention may admit to otherequally effective embodiments.

FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a distributed infrastructure having avariety of information assets, according to one embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example computing system used to provide anenterprise information technology management tool, according to oneembodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3 illustrates a method for monitoring user interactions with searchresults in order to identify and share relationships about informationassets within an enterprise, according to one embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 4 illustrates a method for generating a semantic graph capturingrelationships between information assets, according to one embodiment ofthe invention.

FIG. 5A illustrates an example of semantic graph generated/evolved bymonitoring users navigating through a paginated list of search resultsusing the methods of FIGS. 3 and 4, according to one embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 5B illustrates an example of information assets presented as queryresults, according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6 illustrates a method for presenting a user navigating searchresults with information about asset relationships identified using asemantic graph, according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7 illustrates a method for identifying information assets within anenterprise, according to one embodiment of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Some enterprise-level information management systems provide a searchinterface which allow users to access information asset descriptions,data models, and/or other similar objects residing in a database or (orstored as metadata). Often however, the results presented using suchtools result in significant ambiguity and confusion for the user,particularly for large result-sets. For example, a query result whichincludes a large count of returned assets can require many pages to bedisplayed. Further, such results may be interrelated in a variety ofinteresting ways not accounted for in the result set. As a result,end-users who are unaware as to how the information assets are organizedcan get lost in a large number of results and are forced to simply jumpfrom one page to the other, hoping to find to the particular relatedassets they need. Further, when a user accesses one element of a searchresult, the interface does not provide any visibility to additionalrelated assets without performing a second explicit search.

Embodiments of the invention provide techniques for creating, evolving,and accessing a weighted semantic graph to manage (and potentiallyidentify) related information assets within an enterprise. As usedherein, “information assets” broadly refers to any form of informationtechnology used by a given enterprise (e.g., application servers,databases (and underlying tables and columns) data models, functions,jobs, scripts, ETL tools, network services, other server systems andapplications, networking devices, appliance systems, etc. In oneembodiment, an enterprise information management system may beconfigured with the appropriate tools (and metadata) needed to searchfor a specified set of information assets. For example, aweb-server/application server/database system may be used to provide asearch interface which relies on keywords. When a user searches for agiven keyword (or words), information assets which match the keyword maybe returned and presented to the user.

Once presented, the management tool monitors how a user interacts withthe results, e.g., by monitoring a user clicking through a sequence ofresults. For example, if a user clicks “information asset 1” and then“information asset 2” (within a configurable time window) the managementtool registers a relationship in a weighted graph between the two. Whenthe user subsequently clicks on “information asset 3,” a relationshipbetween “information asset 2” and “information asset 3” is captured.Over time, if additional users click through the same path on searchresults, the weight between “information asset 1” and “information asset2” is increased. If the weight assigned to a link reaches auser-configurable weight, then search results which include these twoelements are ordered to be next to one another. When a user selects oneasset, data related to or describing that asset may be presented.Further, the search interface may inform a user of what informationassets are related to a selected one. In one embodiment, the searchinterface may access the semantic graph and identify information assetsrelated to the selected one. Doing so may help inform the user aboutrelationships to assets of which they were unaware—or may help them findrelated assets without having to hunt for them in a large set ofresults.

In one embodiment, the semantic graph captures relationships betweenassets based on user behavior, allowing the relative importance ofinformation assets to be identified. The stronger the edge weights to an“information asset” in the semantic graph, the more important that assetis to users within the enterprise. As noted, in large organizations,managing information assets is a significant problem; in particular,where some informally managed assets or ad-hoc systems become widelyused. Accordingly in one embodiment, the relative weights of the linksto such an asset may be used to identify informal systems within theenterprise that are targets to bring within the enterprises' formalinformation management structures. Conversely, a managed asset havingfew links in the semantic graph (or links with low weights) indicatesthat the asset may be underused. Such assets may be identified ascandidates for being shut down, or may be investigated to learn why thegiven asset is underused.

In the following, reference is made to embodiments of the invention.However, it should be understood that the invention is not limited tospecific described embodiments. Instead, any combination of thefollowing features and elements, whether related to differentembodiments or not, is contemplated to implement and practice theinvention. Furthermore, although embodiments of the invention mayachieve advantages over other possible solutions and/or over the priorart, whether or not a particular advantage is achieved by a givenembodiment is not limiting of the invention. Thus, the followingaspects, features, embodiments and advantages are merely illustrativeand are not considered elements or limitations of the appended claimsexcept where explicitly recited in a claim(s). Likewise, reference to“the invention” shall not be construed as a generalization of anyinventive subject matter disclosed herein and shall not be considered tobe an element or limitation of the appended claims except whereexplicitly recited in a claim(s).

As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the presentinvention may be embodied as a system, method or computer programproduct. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the formof an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment(including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or anembodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may allgenerally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.”Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of acomputer program product embodied in one or more computer readablemedium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.

Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may beutilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signalmedium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer readablestorage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic,magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system,apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. Morespecific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer readablestorage medium would include the following: an electrical connectionhaving one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, arandom access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasableprogrammable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber,a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storagedevice, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. In the context of this document, a computer readable storagemedium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or store a programfor use by or in connection with an instruction execution system,apparatus or device.

A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signalwith computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, inbaseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may takeany of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to,electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. Acomputer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium thatis not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate,propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmittedusing any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless,wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination ofthe foregoing.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of thepresent invention may be written in any combination of one or moreprogramming languages, including an object oriented programming languagesuch as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional proceduralprogramming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similarprogramming languages. The program code may execute entirely on theuser's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alonesoftware package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remotecomputer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latterscenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computerthrough any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or awide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an externalcomputer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet ServiceProvider).

Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions maybe provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, specialpurpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus toproduce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via theprocessor of the computer or other programmable data processingapparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified inthe flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.

These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computerreadable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable dataprocessing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particularmanner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readablemedium produce an article of manufacture including instructions whichimplement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer,other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, otherprogrammable apparatus or other devices to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer or other programmable apparatus provide processes forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

Embodiments of the invention may be provided to end users through acloud computing infrastructure. Cloud computing generally refers to theprovision of scalable computing resources as a service over a network.More formally, cloud computing may be defined as a computing capabilitythat provides an abstraction between the computing resource and itsunderlying technical architecture (e.g., servers, storage, networks),enabling convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool ofconfigurable computing resources that can be rapidly provisioned andreleased with minimal management effort or service provider interaction.Thus, cloud computing allows a user to access virtual computingresources (e.g., storage, data, applications, and even completevirtualized computing systems) in “the cloud,” without regard for theunderlying physical systems (or locations of those systems) used toprovide the computing resources.

Typically, cloud computing resources are provided to a user on apay-per-use basis, where users are charged only for the computingresources actually used (e.g., an amount of storage space consumed by auser or a number of virtualized systems instantiated by the user). Auser can access any of the resources that reside in the cloud at anytime, and from anywhere across the Internet. In context of the presentinvention, a management tool describing a variety of information assetsmay be deployed to a computing cloud (whether the cloud itself isprovided by the enterprise or a third party). For example, themanagement tool could monitor cloud based database systems, virtualmachines, and a variety of other server applications.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality and operation of possible implementations ofsystems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment or portionof code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations ofspecial purpose hardware and computer instructions.

Further, particular embodiments of the invention are described aparticular example management tool used to monitor a collection ofinformation assets. However, it should be understood that the techniquesdescribed herein may be adapted to a variety of purposes in addition tothe uses for predictive modeling analysis. Accordingly, references tothe specific embodiment are included to be illustrative and notlimiting.

FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a distributed infrastructure 100 havinga variety of information assets, according to one embodiment of theinvention. As shown, the computing infrastructure 100 includes anenterprise information technology management system 105 and informationassets 130, each connected to a communications network 120. Theinformation assets 130 generally represent a collection of informationtechnology resources managed by a given enterprise. In this particularexample, the information assets 130 include structured systems 110 ₁₋₂(e.g., relational database systems storing enterprise data) serversystems 115 ₁₋₂ (e.g., web servers, other web-based services and/orapplications, or unstructured data/document storage such as a contentmanagement server), and unstructured information assets 125 (e.g.,spreadsheets, local databases or document stores, as well as otherinformation assets).

As described in greater detail below, the management system 105 may beconfigured with the appropriate hardware and software applicationsneeded to provide an interface to the information asserts 130 managed bythe enterprise. Such hardware and software applications may beconfigured to monitor users interacting with search results, and basedon the monitoring, create and evolve a semantic graph representing therelationships between information assets 130 in the enterprise. Forexample, assume a search result provides a list of information assets130 responsive to a search query. In such a case, when a user accessessuccessive items in the search results, a semantic graph is updated tocreate weighted relationships between elements in the search results.Thus, if a user first clicks on a search result listing database 110 ₁and then on an unstructured asset 125, the management tool registersbetween these two information assets as a weighted edge in a semanticgraph between these two information assets.

Over time, if additional users navigate the same path through searchresults, the weight between database 110 ₁ and unstructured asset 125increases. That is, edges between information assets in the semanticgraph are weighted according to the paths that previous users havefollowed while navigating search results. If the weight assigned to anedge between two information assets reaches a user-configurablethreshold, then management system 105 may create a permanent semanticassociation between them. In one embodiment, however, newly creatededges in the semantic graph may need to be confirmed by an administratorprior to a permanent semantic association being created. Further, edgesbetween nodes in the semantic graph may include multiple weights,distinguished based on context. For example, context may be relative toan organizational role (e.g., a business user versus an applicationdeveloper). Of course, other contexts could be used.

Once a semantic relationship is established between two nodes (i.e.,between two information assets 130), the management system 105 may beconfigured to enhance search results by presenting users with anindication of related information assets 130, based on the semanticgraph. As an example, assume a user searches for assets that relate to“customer name.” Typically, customer related information will be storedin multiple information assets across the enterprise. In such a case, inaddition to returning the list of assets that support “customer name,”the management system 105 also assists the user in understanding relatedinformation assets 130 for their query. Thus, when a user selects aresult of the “customer name” query (e.g., “Customer Mart”), they arepresented with additional information assets that are related to thatselected asset (perhaps “Customer ODS,” “Customer Name StandardizationRoutines,” and so on), where the additional information assets areidentified using the semantic graph. Further the semantic relationshipbetween two assets may be reinforced, e.g., by increasing the weightbetween the “Customer Mart” information asset and the “CustomerODS”information asset.

Additionally, metadata describing information assets 130 in the semanticgraph may be mapped to a domain ontology. Doing so allows additionalinter-asset relationships to be identified. For example, nodes in thesemantic graph lacking edges (meaning the information asset representedby such a node does not have a relationship to any other asserts) may beclassified according to the domain ontology and associated with otherassets. Of course, the management system 105 may allow an administratorto manually associate one asset with another in the semantic graph. Inone embodiment, the edge weights may be updated dynamically, as a usernavigates through search results. Alternatively, the semantic graph maybe updated periodically after a certain time window or after gathering aminimum amount of asset relationship data.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example of the management system 105 used toprovide an enterprise information technology management tool 221,according to one embodiment of the invention. As shown, the managementsystem 105 includes, without limitation, a central processing unit (CPU)205, a network interface 215, an interconnect 220, a memory 225, andstorage 230. The computer system 200 may also include an I/O deviceinterface 210 connecting I/O devices 212 (e.g., keyboard, display andmouse devices) to the computer system 200.

In general, the CPU 205 retrieves and executes programming instructionsstored in the memory 225. Similarly, the CPU 205 stores and retrievesapplication data residing in the memory 225. The interconnect 220provides a communication path for transmitting programming instructionsand application data between the CPU 205, I/O devices interface 210,storage 230, network interface 215, and memory 225. CPU 205 is includedto be representative of a single CPU, multiple CPUs, a CPU havingmultiple processing cores, and the like. And the memory 225 is generallyincluded to be representative of a random access memory. The storage 230may be a hard disk drive or solid state storage device (SSD). Further,although shown as a single unit, the storage 230 may be a combination offixed and/or removable storage devices, such as fixed disc drives,floppy disc drives, tape drives, removable memory cards, opticalstorage, network attached storage (NAS), or a storage area-network(SAN).

Illustratively, the memory 225 stores an enterprise IT management tool221, which itself includes a query tool 222, a graphical user interface224, a monitoring component 226 and a semantic graph generator 228. Andstorage 230 stores a semantic graph 232, an ontology definition 234 andan information asset database 236. In one embodiment, the managementtool 221 provides a software application configured to allow users tosearch for information assets, monitor users navigating search results,and build a semantic graph 232. Thus, the semantic graph 232 provides arepresentation of the relationships among information assets stored bythe information asset database 236 learned by observing user behavior.

The monitoring component 226 may monitor a user navigating throughsearch results and update or evolve the semantic graph 232 based on usernavigation. When a user jumps from one information asset to anotherlisted in search results, the monitoring component 226 can record (orupdate) an association between a first accessed element from the searchresults and a second accessed element. In one embodiment, for such anassociation to be recorded, the user may need to jump from the firstinformation asset to the second information asset within a specifiedamount of time. While the time may be configured as a matter ofpreference, specific values may be set on a case-by-case basis. Forexample, assume a user queries for assets and is presented with apaginated result-set spanning hundreds of pages. As the user scansthrough the first page, hoping to find the wanted assets, the usernotices a potential match and clicks on it for details. After goingthrough the asset details, the user (reasoning from his experience ordomain knowledge) decides that to view a related asset. Following this,the user returns back to the paginated results and starts scanningthrough pages. Within the next few seconds (say less than ten seconds),the user spots another asset and clicks on it. And after doing so,spends between 2-5 minutes reading the details of this second asset andthen, returns to the paginated results. In this scenario, two differentthresholds for time-periods are may be set. The first one is an upperthreshold (desirable behavior is that the user ‘quickly’ clicks anotherrelated asset). However, the second one is a lower threshold (desirablebehavior is that the user spends ‘considerable’ time reading the secondasset). If instead, the user returns back to the paginated results tooquickly (as specified by the second threshold), then the monitoringcomponent 226 may determine that there is no relationship between thefirst and second asset. Of course, one of ordinary skill in the art willrecognize that the threshold (or thresholds) may be set in a variety ofways.

Once a specified number of users have traversed the same path betweeninformation assets, i.e., have accessed the first and second informationassets in search results using the same sequence in a manner thatsatisfies the thresholds selected for a particular case, the semanticgraph generator 228 may add a permanent semantic association between twoinformation assets in the semantic graph 232.

Once generated, the management tool 221 may present users with anindication of relationships between information assets reflected in thesemantic graph 232 when users navigate search results. To that end,graphical user interface 224 may allow users to specify query terms usedby the query tool 222 to search the information asset database 236. Forexample, the interface 224 may provide a text box which allows users tospecify keywords (or other attributes) of a set of information assets auser is looking for. Once executed, the results of the query arepresented in the interface 224. For example, the interface 224 maypresent a list of information assets sorted by name, type, location,category, etc., or ranked according to relevance. In one embodiment,e.g., the most relevant information assets may be determined as theassets in the results associated with the greatest number of edges inthe semantic graph 232. Further, when a user selects one informationasset, the interface may access the semantic graph 232 to identify edgesto other, related information assets, and present the user with anindication of the related assets.

The ontology 234 may be used to infer additional relationships betweeninformation assets and further evolve the semantic graph 232. Forexample, the information asset database 236 may include a variety ofdescriptive metadata about a given information asset, e.g., a name, aset of semantic tags, keywords, summaries, etc. In one embodiment, theontology 234 may be used normalize the information asset metadata to acommon form specified by the particular domain ontology. Doing so allowsrelated information assets to be identified based on the normalizedterms from the ontology 234. For example, the semantic graph generator228 may add new edges to reflect relationships identified using theontology 234, perform transitive closures, sub or super-relationshipinference, etc.

FIG. 3 illustrates a method 300 for monitoring user interactions withsearch results in order to identify and share relationships aboutinformation assets within an enterprise, according to one embodiment ofthe invention. As shown, the method 300 begins at step 305 where themanagement tool receives a user query. As noted, such a query mayinclude a set of user specified keywords describing the informationassets a user is looking for. However, such a query could also bespecified using attributes of the sought after information assets,specified, e.g., by asset type, class, or category, or combinations ofboth. At step 310, the management tool identifies a set of informationassets responsive to the query, and the results are then presented to auser at step 315. As noted, the graphical interface provided by themanagement tool may present a list of information assets sorted by name,type, location, category, etc.

At step 320, the management tool may begin to monitor a user interactingwith the list of search results presented at step 315. At step 325,should the user access successive records in the result set within aspecified time, then at step 330, the management tool records anindication of an association between two such assets. The monitoring atstep 320 continues so long as a user navigates a given set of searchresults. Further method 300 may be repeated for new searches by the sameuser as well as other users. Doing so allows the wisdom across multipleusers in an enterprise to be captured over time. For example, themanagement tool may present users with related information assets whenpresenting search results.

FIG. 4 illustrates a method 400 for generating a semantic graphrepresenting relationships between information assets, according to oneembodiment of the invention. As shown, the method 400 begins at step405, where the semantic graph generator identifies information assets toinclude in the semantic graph. While this may include all of the assetsin a given enterprise, it can also be limited to assets of auser-specified type, category or designation. For example, a semanticgraph could be generated using only the “production” or “development”information assets of an enterprise.

At step 410, the semantic graph generator may build an initial semanticgraph from known relationships between information assets. For example,using the method 300, over time, a series of relationships betweeninformation assets is identified while monitoring user behavior. In oneembodiment, each such relationship is used to create an edge in thesemantic graph. Further, each such edge may be assigned a weight,increased each time the path between the two particular assets isfollowed by a user. Once the weight on a given edge passes auser-specified threshold, a meaningful relationship between the nodesconnected by the edge is presumed to have been identified. That is, thetwo information assets connected by the edge are related in a mannerthat is meaningful to users, as reflected in the history of multipleusers navigating different search results. As another example the graphgenerator may create edges based on the relative strengths of the edgesexiting a given node. For example, if one node includes many edgesconnected to other nodes, but includes one edge having a weight thatexceeds all the others by a configurable threshold, then this edge maybe modified into a permanent semantic association, while others arediscarded.

Once generated, the edges in the semantic graph may be used to enhancethe presentation of search results to a user. At step 415, the graphgenerator may evolve or update the semantic graph based on additionalrecorded feedback of users interacting with search results. That is, thesemantic graph may continue to evolve over time, as new informationassets are identified and new certain paths are reinforced in responseto users interacting with search results.

The graph generator may perform optional steps 420 and 425 to modify thesemantic graph generated at steps 410 and 415. At step 420, the graphgenerator may identify nodes on the semantic graph without any edges toother nodes (or no edges that exceed a user-configurable threshold).Once identified, the graph generator may prompt an administrator tospecify any desired edges from the identified nodes to other nodes inthe semantic graph (or to prune such isolated nodes from the semanticgraph). At step 425, the graph generator may identify or modify nodes inthe semantic graph based on a domain ontology. As noted, such anontology may allow related information assets to be identified from thenormalized terms from the ontology. For example, the semantic graphgenerator may add, modify or remove edges to the semantic graph in orderto reflect relationships identified using the ontology.

FIG. 5A illustrates a portion of a semantic graph 500 generated andevolved by monitoring users navigating through a paginated list ofsearch results using the methods of FIGS. 3 and 4, according to oneembodiment of the invention. As shown, the graph 500 includes multiplenodes. Each node represents an information asset of an enterpriserelated to others by edges. In this example, an edge 505 connects node 1to node 2, an edge 510 connects node 1 to node 4, an edge 515 connectsnode 1 to node 6, and an edge 520 connects node 1 to node 25. Otheredges in the semantic graph connect nodes as illustrated in FIG. 5A. Anedge connecting two nodes in graph 500 represents a relationship betweenthose nodes created by the semantic graph generator in performing themethod 400, as discussed above. Each node may have an associated weightindicating the relative strengths of the learned relationship betweennodes.

FIG. 5B illustrates an example of information assets presented as queryresults 550, according to one embodiment of the invention. As shown,query results 550 are presented as an ordered list of information assets(labeled as elements e_1 through e_36). The ordered lists results 550are also divided into six pages, and may be presented using any suitablegraphical user interface. Assume for this example that the numericalvalues of the nodes of semantic graph 500 of FIG. 5A correspond to thenumeric values in elements of list 550.

As noted, while the user interacts with the search results 550, therelationships between nodes in the semantic graph 500 may be used toupdate semantic graph 500 as well as present the user with an indicationof related information assets. For example, assume the user presentedwith search results 550 first accesses node 1. In response, theinterface may be updated to indicate that nodes 2, 4, 6 and 25 arerelated to node 1. Doing so may encourage the user to favor the relatedassets when navigating the search results, as well as simply help theuser understand what information assets are related to a selected one.

Further, the semantic graph may be updated based on the path a usertakes while navigating search results 550. For example, assume the userpresented with search results 550 first accesses element e_4(corresponding to node 4 of graph 500) and then accesses element e_34(corresponding to node 34 of graph 500). In such a case, the semanticgraph 500 may be updated with an edge 530 between node 4 and node 34.The weight assigned to edge 530 may be increased as other users navigatebetween the information assets associated with nodes 4 and 34. Once theweight assigned to edge 530 exceeds a user-specified threshold, thenedge 530 may be updated as a permanent semantic link relating nodes 4and 34.

Similarly, as noted above, a domain ontology or other logical inferencesmay be used to update and modify the semantic graph 500. For example,assume a transitive closure operation is performed on semantic graph500. In such a case, as node 1 is related to node 25 (by edge 520) andas node 1 is related to edge node 6 (by edge 515), an edge 525 may beadded to the semantic graph 500. That is, as node 1 is related to bothnode 6 and node 25, node 6 and node 25 may be related to one another. Inone embodiment, the transitive relationship between node 6 and node 25(represented by edge 525) may need to be confirmed by an administratorprior to a permanent semantic association being created.

FIG. 6 illustrates a method 600 for presenting a user navigating searchresults with information about asset relationships identified using asemantic graph, according to one embodiment of the invention. As shown,the method 600 begins at step 605, where the enterprise informationmanagement tool receives a user query. As noted, such a query mayinclude a set of user specified keywords describing the informationassets a user is looking for. At step 610, the management toolidentifies a set of information assets responsive to the query and theresults are then presented to the user.

Once displayed, the management tool waits for the user to select anelement from the search results. At step 615, the user selects one ofthe information assets presented in the search results. At step 620, themanagement tool identifies assets in the semantic graph related to theone selected at step 625 and updates the interface to present the userwith an indication of the related information assets. In one embodiment,related information assets may be identified, in part, based oncontextual information about the user (e.g., user role, etc.) submittingthe query. That is, the related information assets shown to a given usermay tailored based on the relevance of certain assets to that user.

Optionally, at step 630, the management tool may remove unrelated assetsfrom the display as well as present the user with annotations providedby other users characterizing the relationships between informationassets. The interface may also allow the user to provide their ownannotations or comments regarding the relationship between oneinformation asset and another.

In addition to monitoring users interacting with search results toidentify relationships between information assets and to using theidentified relationships to enhance subsequent user-navigation of searchresults, the identified relationships may be used in other ways tomanage the information assets of a given enterprise. For example, nodesin the semantic graph having a relatively large number of relationshipsto other nodes may be readily identified as relatively “important”information assets, as users have navigated to/from such an informationasset from many others. By evaluating the information assets that formsuch “hubs” within the semantic graph, an enterprise can identify assetsthat should be formally administered and managed or given priority whenallocating resources. That is, the common wisdom captured by monitoringusers interacting with search results also surfaces assets whichcurrently unmanaged assets. Conversely, some information assets may haverelatively few links to other assets (or none at all). In the case ofinformation asserts managed by the enterprise to provide data to certainusers, the low utility of such “underperforming” assets may beidentified from the semantic graph. Such information assets may besunset to reduce operating costs in the appropriate case. Thus, thecrowd wisdom captured in the semantic graph allows informationgovernance structures within the enterprise to make decisions, such asreconciling relative asset importance to improve operating costs,improve data quality for an information asset which is used often butnot formally managed within the enterprise (thus having low data qualityor service). The crowd wisdom captured in the semantic graph may also beused to improve compliance issues. For example, rarely used assets whichare not properly managed containing sensitive data might exposesensitive data to the risk of non-compliance with legal requirements.

FIG. 7 illustrates a method 700 for identifying information assetswithin an enterprise, according to one embodiment of the invention. Asshown, the method 700 begins at step 705 where the management toolretrieves the current semantic graph for a given set of informationassets within the enterprise. As noted, the semantic graph may begenerated according to the method 400 of FIG. 4.

At step 710, the management tool may traverse the nodes of the semanticgraph to identify information asset “hubs,” i.e., information assetswith a specified minimum number of edges to other information assets.Once identified, an enterprise may determine the operational state ofsuch assets. For example, some information assets may begin as an ad-hoclocal database used by a relatively small group of individuals. However,if such an information asset proves useful, the original group ofindividuals may share its existence with others outside of the initialgroup. Subsequently, as other uses search for the local database andnavigate to/from this asset in search results, edges to the localdatabase form in the semantic graph. Once an edge count for a given nodeexceeds the threshold, the enterprise can identify the asset in thesemantic graph as one to consider to formalize within the enterprise.Similarly, an enterprise may evaluate an information asset “hub” todetermine whether it should be divided into smaller information assets.Doing so may result in information assets having more specializedfunctions than the information asset “hub,” thereby reducing operationaldependency on the information asset “hub” itself.

At step 715, the management tool may traverse the nodes of the semanticgraph to identify information assets with few (or no) edges to otherswithin the semantic graph. Doing so allows information assets having anedge count that falls below a specified threshold to be identified. Asnoted, a node having few edges in the semantic graph may indicate thatthe information asset corresponding to that node may be of limitedutility to the enterprise. At step 720, the nodes (and correspondinginformation assets) identified at step 710 and 715 may be presented to auser.

Advantageously, embodiments of the invention provide an informationasset management tool configured to capture and utilize crowd wisdom inorder to identify and share relationships about information assetswithin the enterprise. As described above, a semantic graph may begenerated by monitoring users navigating through search results whichprovide a set of information assets responsive to a search query. Byrecording the navigation path taken by many users, relationships betweeninformation assets may be identified. Further, once generated, thesemantic graph may be used to present users with in indication ofrelated information assets as part of the search results. Further still,the semantic graph may also be used to identify information assert“hubs” as well as information assets that may provide low utility toindividuals within the enterprise.

While the foregoing is directed to embodiments of the present invention,other and further embodiments of the invention may be devised withoutdeparting from the basic scope thereof, and the scope thereof isdetermined by the claims that follow.

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer-readable storage medium storinginstructions executable to perform an operation to govern informationassets managed by an enterprise, the operation comprising: identifying,by an enterprise information asset management application executing on acomputing system having at least a processor and a memory, a set ofsearch results responsive to a query requesting a subset of informationassets within the enterprise; providing the set of search results;receiving a selection of a first information asset presented in the setof search results; identifying at least a second information assetpresented in the set of search results, wherein the first informationasset and the second information asset are related to one another by anedge in a semantic graph that represents relationships between theplurality of information assets, wherein the semantic graph associatesthe plurality of information assets with nodes of the semantic graph,wherein the relationships between nodes in the semantic graph aregenerated and updated by monitoring user behavior in accessing theplurality of information assets with the set of search results andwithout requiring user input explicitly specifying to update therelationships, wherein the semantic graph is updated based on a domainontology; parsing the semantic graph in order to identify at least oneinformation asset selected from: (i) an informal information asset whoserelationships satisfy an overuse criterion and (ii) an underusedinformation asset whose relationships satisfy an underuse criterion; anddesignating the at least one information asset as being overused orunderused, whereafter the at least one information asset is formallycommissioned or decommissioned.
 2. The computer-readable storage mediumof claim 1, wherein each node represents one of the plurality ofinformation assets, and wherein the semantic graph further includes aplurality of weighted edges, each connecting two nodes among theplurality of nodes and indicating a relationship strength between tworespective information assets represented by the two nodes.
 3. Thecomputer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the plurality ofinformation assets include at least one of a database system, a webservice, and a server application.
 4. The computer-readable storagemedium of claim 1, wherein the operation further comprises: monitoringone of a plurality of users selecting a third information assetpresented in the set of search results, and subsequently a fourthinformation asset presented in the set of search results; and storing anindication of a relationship between the third information asset and thefourth information asset in the semantic graph.
 5. The computer-readablestorage medium of claim 4, wherein the operation further comprises:assigning a weight to the relationship between the third informationasset and the fourth information asset, wherein the assigned weight isincreased each time one of the plurality of users navigates from thethird information asset to the fourth information asset; and upondetermining that the assigned weight exceeds a specified threshold,updating the semantic graph with an edge connecting respective nodes inthe semantic graph corresponding to the third information asset and thefourth information asset.
 6. The computer-readable storage medium ofclaim 1, wherein the operation further comprises receiving an annotationcharacterizing a relationship between the first information asset andthe second information asset represented by the edge in the semanticgraph.
 7. A system of governing information assets managed by anenterprise, the system comprising: a computer processor; and a memorystoring an enterprise information asset management application which,when executed on the computer processor, performs an operationcomprising: identifying, by an enterprise information asset managementapplication executed on a computing system having at least a processorand a memory, a set of search results responsive to a query requesting asubset of information assets within the enterprise; providing the set ofsearch results; receiving a selection of a first information assetpresented in the set of search results; identifying at least a secondinformation asset presented in the set of search results, wherein thefirst information asset and the second information asset are related toone another by an edge in a semantic graph that represents relationshipsbetween the plurality of information assets, wherein the semantic graphassociates the plurality of information assets with nodes of thesemantic graph, wherein the relationships between nodes in the semanticgraph are generated and updated by monitoring user behavior in accessingthe plurality of information assets with the set of search results andwithout requiring user input explicitly specifying to update therelationships, wherein the semantic graph is updated based on a domainontology; parsing the semantic graph in order to identify at least oneinformation asset selected from: (i) an informal information asset whoserelationships satisfy an overuse criterion and (ii) an underusedinformation asset whose relationships satisfy an underuse criterion; anddesignating the at least one information asset as being overused orunderused, whereafter the at least one information asset is formallycommissioned or decommissioned.
 8. The system of claim 7, wherein eachnode represents one of the plurality of information assets, and whereinthe semantic graph further includes a plurality of weighted edges, eachconnecting two nodes among the plurality of nodes and indicating arelationship strength between two respective information assetsrepresented by the two nodes.
 9. The system of claim 7, wherein theplurality of information assets include at least one of a databasesystem, a web service, and a server application.
 10. The system of claim7, wherein the operation further comprises: monitoring one of aplurality of users selecting a third information asset presented in theset of search results, and subsequently a fourth information assetpresented in the set of search results; and storing an indication of arelationship between the third information asset and the fourthinformation asset in the semantic graph.
 11. The system of claim 10,wherein the operation further comprises: assigning a weight to therelationship between the third information asset and the fourthinformation asset, wherein the assigned weight is increased each timeone of the plurality of users navigates from the third information assetto the fourth information asset; and upon determining the assignedweight exceeds a specified threshold, updating the semantic graph withan edge connecting respective nodes in the semantic graph correspondingto the third information asset and the fourth information asset.
 12. Thesystem of claim 7, wherein the operation further comprises receiving anannotation characterizing a relationship between the first informationasset and the second information asset represented by the edge in thesemantic graph.
 13. The system of claim 7, wherein each of: (i) theinformal information asset whose relationships satisfy the overusecriterion and (ii) the underused information asset whose relationshipssatisfy the underuse criterion are identified; wherein the operationfurther comprises: designating the informal information asset as beingoverused, whereafter the informal information asset is commissioned as aformal asset; and designating the underused information asset as beingunderused, whereafter the underused information asset is decommissionedas an information asset.
 14. The system of claim 13, wherein anindication that the informal information asset is designated as beingoverused is output, wherein an indication that the underused informationasset is designated as being overused is output, wherein the enterpriseinformation asset management application is configured to: provide agraphical user interface for outputting the set of search results to auser; remove one or more unrelated assets from the graphical userinterface; and present one or more annotations provided by other usersand characterizing relationships between information assets.
 15. Thesystem of claim 14, wherein the enterprise information asset managementapplication has a plurality of components including a query tool, thegraphical user interface, a monitoring component, and a semantic graphgenerator; wherein the query tool is configured to identify the set ofsearch results responsive to the query; wherein the monitoring componentis configured to monitor user behavior in accessing the plurality ofinformation assets with the set of search results; wherein the semanticgraph generator is configured to generate the semantic graph.
 16. Thesystem of claim 15, wherein a representation of each information assetis stored in an information asset database, wherein the informationasset database, the domain ontology, and the semantic graph arerepresented as separate data structures; wherein the semantic graph isautomatically evolved based on navigation of search results by aplurality of users over time and without any input from the plurality ofusers explicitly specifying to update the semantic graph, wherein theoperation further comprises: upon identifying, based on the semanticgraph, an information asset that does not have any relationships toother information assets, designating the information asset as anisolated information asset, whereafter an indication is output toinstruct an administrative user to specify one or more desiredrelationships for the isolated information asset.
 17. The system ofclaim 16, wherein the operation further comprises: maintaining theinformation assets by adding, removing, and modifying nodes in thesemantic graph based on the domain ontology; wherein each noderepresents one of the plurality of information assets, wherein thesemantic graph further includes a plurality of weighted edges, eachconnecting two nodes among the plurality of nodes and indicating arelationship strength between two respective information assetsrepresented by the two nodes.
 18. The system of claim 17, wherein theplurality of information assets include each of: (i) a database system;(ii) a web service; (iii) a server application; (iv) a data model; (v) afunction; (vi) a job; (vii) a script; (viii) an extract, transform, andload (ETL) tool; (ix) a network service; (x) a networking device; and(xi) an appliance system.
 19. The system of claim 18, wherein theoperation further comprises: monitoring one of the plurality of users:(i) selecting a third information asset presented in the set of searchresults and (ii) subsequently selecting a fourth information assetpresented in the set of search results; upon determining that the thirdand fourth information assets were selected within a preconfigured timewindow of one another, increasing a relationship strength between thethird and fourth information assets in the semantic graph; and whereinupon determining that the third and fourth information assets were notselected within a preconfigured time window of one another, norelationship strength between the third and fourth information assets isincreased in the semantic graph.
 20. The system of claim 19, wherein theoperation further comprises: assigning a weight to the relationshipbetween the third and fourth information assets, wherein the assignedweight is increased each time one of the plurality of users navigatesfrom the third information asset to the fourth information asset withinthe preconfigured time window; and upon determining that the assignedweight exceeds a specified threshold, updating the semantic graph withan edge connecting respective nodes in the semantic graph correspondingto the third and fourth information assets.
 21. The system of claim 20,wherein the operation further comprises: upon receiving user inputcharacterizing a relationship between the first and second informationassets represented by the edge in the semantic graph, generating anannotation based on the received user input, whereafter the generatedannotation is assigned to at least one of the first and secondinformation assets, wherein the generated annotation is output.